Finally saw the full effect of Illegal Immigration in Los Angeles. We're in trouble.

Boy, I don't know what planet you reside on, but illegals who come here have no jobs, so who do you think pays when they get sick and go to the hospital? Who pays for their kids to attend our schools? Who provides assistance to feed their families?

The illegals aren't the only ones looking for a better life, what about all those who waited in line, filed the proper documents and went thru the immigration process? I guess to you they don't matter. And as for fixing our problems here, my point is the monies that are spent dealing with this whole issue could be going toward current problems in this country. What about homeless vets who served our country? What about the storm ravaged areas in the gulf? I think they deserve precedence over those who have no regard for the laws of this country. Apparently you have not seen the costs associated with dealing with the illegal immigration issue. Any taxes that they pay pale in comparison to all the freebies they get from city, state and federal governments. Maybe you should be helping them by sending your paychecks to them to lesson the burden on the American taxpayer.

Check out data from the Heritage foundation as to the cost burden on the American public

www.heritage.org...

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain

I just invited my very Mexican friend to go fishing up in Big Bear. And he's super Mexican.

Really? HE is Supermexican? I always wondered who was behind the mask!!

a reply to: blupblup


Whilst reading you post, your signature caught my eye >>>>


"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity

It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded

our humanity"


Just wanted to ask you your views on whose *human rights* are

the more important .....

* The heavily taxed citizen with little improvement in their

circumstances over the last few years due to their countries dire

economic situation ....

OR

* The 'new' immigrant to their country who immediately gets

all the same or indeed more benefits plus, and has not

contributed one cent into the system.

As they both have 'human rights' .... who's 'rights' super cede who's

a reply to: Krazysh0t
Several points: I forgot to mention about Japan that you mentioned and keep bringing up. The interesting thing about Japan, is that Japan, as it stands today, was the brain child, not of just the United States, but also that of a group of nations, namely: Russia, China, Great Britain, and the United States of America. While the United States was the primary force there, there was a political side that Gen. McCarthur had to listen to, or else he could have been removed, and like Eisenhower, had to be political and diplomatic. So Japan was not under the auspices of the USA during the reconstruction, so it can not be counted as a success solely on the USA. Those countries that the USA has gotten involved in soley for nation building have failed completely and turned out far worse in the long run.

So while it is appealing to state we should go into another country and rebuild it, the reality is that it will fail and create a bigger mess than it already is. Mexico would be a total and complete failure in that aspect. How much more money needs to be pumped into that country before the USA can not afford to do such? In 2011 we sent almost a billion dollars to that country and even then in 2012 there was another 412 million sent and that is also not including the other things that are sent down to that country, like military hardware.

Mexico, according to the UN, is a third world country. It is not a first world country, and is not a second world country, but a third world, developing nation.
Why change the legislation on drugs? This is not about drugs, this is about the flow of people through the southern border, and the unwillingness of both the US federal government to do anything, namely the US congress and the Mexican federal government, which has violated several treaties with the US, that said treaties going back to the Treaty of HIldago, back after the Mexican American War, where it was written in, that Mexico would be responsible for securing their side of the border.

And the current system is not working well at all. I have been stating that all along. We can not continue to allow for the mass crossing and the drain on the system by illegal immigrants to the USA. And I am not advocating martial law. Where have I stated martial law? Did I state that the military be put in cities? No, in fact I am talking about precedents that is already in place, and using the US military as it should be, for the defense of the country, not to hamper the people. Contrary to popular belief, as you have alluded to, the US border with Mexico, is not all in cities, but much is in open wide spaces. The US border patrol is not able to effectively patrol those wide expanses, and it would make sense to give the job to those who are best suited to do such. And by deputizing them, it means that it would require that they follow all of the laws of the USA, and thus remove them temporarily from the US military service. After all if the US Coast guard can act as both an arm of the US military and law enforcement, then the legal precedent is already set.

There has to be an open and full declaration of war for the articles of the Geneva convention to be in effect. If it applied to any other time, then bases like Gitmo would not be a controversy or exist.
And if it was of such concern to all involved, then the Mexican military would not be involved in using deadly force against the USA, or assisting those who are either smuggling drugs or people into the USA, and would be stopping them from crossing the border, but they don’t and do assist, even to the point of threatening to use military force against those on the US side of the border.

Well then what about Iran, or Iraq, or Afganistan, or Egypt, or a few of the West African countries, or the Philippines, (who asked the US to leave and we did and now they are about to have a bad civil war) or Vietnam, or any other country where the USA was in, and tried to nation build, and it failed completely, or the government ended up far worse. Take Cuba for example, funny thing is that the USA supported Castro during his revolution, and when he did not do what USA wanted, the country turned on him. The US foreign policies when it comes to nation building is 99% of the time, a complete and total failure.


I am saying prison time for those who violate the law and cross illegally a second time, which ironically, is the law as it stands right now, that is chosen to be ignored by the US federal government. And funny how those who are deported, seem to make their way back, and funny how they seem to not be who we would want in the USA in the first place. After all I am sure the families and victims of such, are willing to forgive.

And with the Nigerian prince email scam, that is electronic, not in person. The solution to that is to remove the email or turn off the computer. That email is not going to give you a virulent form of TB, that email is not going to kill you, that email is not going to cause the kinds of problems that an illegal immigrant can do to a person in the country, like screw up your social security payment or make it where you have a larger amount of taxes to have.

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
a reply to: FyreByrd

I said quite plainly that I am half Portuguese...I am NOT Brazilian.
Brazilians speak Portuguese. BRAZIL is in SOUTH AMERICA
Portugual...is in EUROPE.

Next to us...is SPAIN...SPAIN birthed SPANISH....Mexicans never spoke SPANISH....until the SPANIARDS invaded.

So if I am "racist" for not wanting to almost be killed in a F***ING Hospital because people speak SPANISH...

Then I would have to be "racist" against SPANIARDS also.

And since MEXICO is not a RACE. And most are Mestizo or European blood also...
I would have to also be "racist" against Europeans? Especially Southern Europeans like myself??

Do you see how incredibly stupid this is?

Thank you...

Thank you for clarifying - I thought you said something about Brazil and liking brown people and wasn't going to go back and find it.

I never called you a racist - in fact what I said was along (I'm not going to look for my old post either) the lines that I didn't think you considered yourself a racist. I would say that your remarks were bigoted. But that was never my point.

My point was/is/and will be that your perception is not a accurate measure of REALITY.

You're pissed off - oh well - thanks for sharing. But your implication that undocumented people are 'taking over entire cities' is just plain wrong.

Same thing is happening in Australia. Yes we stole the land and butchered the indigenous population. Now it's just a melting pot of Indians, Asians, Middle Eastern...etc etc. It's a zoo. Everybody is so boorish. Everybody.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

They pay sales taxes and gas taxes just like the rest of us. In California, and I would think you would know this being a life-long Californian, we pay the highest sales taxes in the nation.

Oh - and didn't you say you KNEW all these undocumented people that work for the government? They'd all have payroll taxes taken out whether or not they went to a legit Social Security Number or not - I think an earlier poster mentioned that.

originally posted by: Night Star
a reply to: FyreByrd

Kind - naw - self-centered much?

Me of all people? Hahahahaha! If you really knew me, you would laugh at that too.

My point is made.

Ever hear of the Dunning Krueger Effect.

originally posted by: GodEmperor
a reply to: FyreByrd

The Native Americans were here first, the Spanish conquistadors came after. I would suggest picking up a history book at your local library.

It's so funny that the op. Thought that these Mexicans came and took his home from him, when it was their so long ago, and even longer native Americans, or ancient nomads from Russia. You guys remember about manifest destiny in school. Full of Bull#. Even the folks from the may flower were from Puritan English. If you really think about it the second poster had it right with the Russians, people who use to in live in that area probably crossed over the Bering strait, and inhibited all the way down to south America. That's the thing about people, we breed and spread like Ants. Especially Catholics who don't believe in birth controls, and the last I checked most Mexicans are catholic.

a reply to: FyreByrd

No, man.. I'm talking about making it uninviting/inhospitable to Americans by not having signs in English also. (At least indicate what kind of store it is.)

Also another point to make is that many of these immigrants are not illegal.

You have many generations of (for example) Korean people living here in the US, and you have many here with established businesses for decades now.

All you need to get a work visa here is a job and you can stay for a long time and eventually get citizenship.

originally posted by: RoScoLaz4
culturally, the continual dilution of a native
population, with a steady and prolonged influx of
various others, inevitably leads to the point where
the original culture has been replaced entirely.

yyyyyup.
Adolf Hitler on Multicultralism (Video) - Mein Kampf

originally posted by: blupblup

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain

I just invited my very Mexican friend to go fishing up in Big Bear. And he's super Mexican.

Really? HE is Supermexican? I always wondered who was behind the mask!!

Doesn't look like that. he looks more like Osama Bin Laden from Chiapas...sorry

originally posted by: LowTechRedneck
All this same stuff was said about the Irish and Italians before, during and after the Civil War. Don't let fear run your perception and understand that America has always been and will always be a big melting pot, Hispanics are just the latest group to be melted down and stirred into the mix.

Utter BS. My grandfather (the Scandanavian one) came here from Italy (Our family thought we were Italian for 150 years...long story) on a boat. He came through Ellis Island and was quarantined for over a month, at 19. My German side came here legally too in the late 1700s.

THAT was our immigration system back then. "Melting Pot"? It's anything but now. Melting implies mixing of all races and cultures. We see the OPPOSITE of that going on. Every race and culture is still separated and fighting in 2014. What "Melted"?

And the term was used back when people slowly assimilated and became "Americanized" and learned English, learned our culture, our traditions, valued us as a country. There is NONE of that now.

This "Melting Pot" meme is ridiculous. And people who say "Immigrants" are lying or disingenuous. Our country was meant to be a nation of IMMIGRANTS per Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Not ILLEGAL Immigrants.

a reply to: FyreByrd

Or maybe they should learn English. If you go to Mexico. you are required to learn their language. What is going on here is that this is by design. It's part of how to tear a country down. There is a laundry list of ways to take a country down. Illegal drugs filling the country, pornography, mass immigration, heavy drinking, get people out of the churches, entertain people with nonsense. Getting a clue yet? Besides we need more taxpayers and people to fill all the new jail cells with. Why not illegal Mexicans?

I do find it a little odd that their own country does not seem to want them, and in some case even seem to push them to move north. Why wouldn't a nation want it's own people a nation without people really isn't much of a nation. Also a sign that nation is growing and getting better is that people want to go there not leave, so you would think they would try harder to keep them not push them away. What are they going to do when most of them have left ((not that I think that will ever happen))?

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: Krazysh0t
*snip* So Japan was not under the auspices of the USA during the reconstruction, so it can not be counted as a success solely on the USA. Those countries that the USA has gotten involved in soley for nation building have failed completely and turned out far worse in the long run.

So by that same token, throw Iraq in there. America wasn't alone in rebuilding that country either. Your point is just splitting hairs here.

So while it is appealing to state we should go into another country and rebuild it, the reality is that it will fail and create a bigger mess than it already is. Mexico would be a total and complete failure in that aspect. How much more money needs to be pumped into that country before the USA can not afford to do such? In 2011 we sent almost a billion dollars to that country and even then in 2012 there was another 412 million sent and that is also not including the other things that are sent down to that country, like military hardware.

The difference between this rebuilding and other rebuildings is this wouldn't be a military engagement. It would be an economic and political engagement. And AGAIN the war on drugs needs to be ended with the cartels taken out before this can be implemented. You are STILL using existing political frameworks to argue your point and I keep repeating over and over that those frameworks wouldn't be the same in this situation.

Mexico, according to the UN, is a third world country. It is not a first world country, and is not a second world country, but a third world, developing nation.

No s#... I'm TRYING to change that with the ending of the war on drugs...

Why change the legislation on drugs? This is not about drugs, this is about the flow of people through the southern border, and the unwillingness of both the US federal government to do anything, namely the US congress and the Mexican federal government, which has violated several treaties with the US, that said treaties going back to the Treaty of HIldago, back after the Mexican American War, where it was written in, that Mexico would be responsible for securing their side of the border.

BECAUSE the people are fleeing violence caused by drug wars. It ALL comes back to the war on drugs. The war on drugs is the biggest mistake our country has done in the 20th century. It has destroyed more lives than any other war that we have undertaken and has created a social atmosphere of gangster lifestyle, disrespect for authority, and increasing totalitarian tactics against the populous. Not to mention it has been a huge money sink and a failure (more people are using drugs than ever before). It is pretty much the root of ALL of America's current problems. The drug war is pretty much the reason why Mexico can't climb out of being a third world country.

You must agree with the drug war with the way you argue so vehemently against ending it. Sad... Still missing the forest for the trees.

*snip* And by deputizing them, it means that it would require that they follow all of the laws of the USA, and thus remove them temporarily from the US military service. After all if the US Coast guard can act as both an arm of the US military and law enforcement, then the legal precedent is already set.

That's a dumb use of the military. It just creates paranoia, strife, and friction against Mexicans and Mexico. Not to mention it won't stop them from crossing the border. They will CONTINUE to flee. Apparently you aren't aware of how bad the violence is down there. If it is so bad that you are fleeing it, do you think a bunch of armed men at the border are going to stop them? That is laughable. They are dead if they don't go, so they will try any option. Barbarian tactics... Get with the 21st century.

There has to be an open and full declaration of war for the articles of the Geneva convention to be in effect. If it applied to any other time, then bases like Gitmo would not be a controversy or exist.
And if it was of such concern to all involved, then the Mexican military would not be involved in using deadly force against the USA, or assisting those who are either smuggling drugs or people into the USA, and would be stopping them from crossing the border, but they don’t and do assist, even to the point of threatening to use military force against those on the US side of the border.

Maybe because the Mexican military is bought out by the cartels? And we all know where their source of income is. You are so short sighted...

Well then what about Iran, or Iraq, or Afganistan, or Egypt, or a few of the West African countries, or the Philippines, (who asked the US to leave and we did and now they are about to have a bad civil war) or Vietnam, or any other country where the USA was in, and tried to nation build, and it failed completely, or the government ended up far worse. Take Cuba for example, funny thing is that the USA supported Castro during his revolution, and when he did not do what USA wanted, the country turned on him. The US foreign policies when it comes to nation building is 99% of the time, a complete and total failure.

All military coups. Listen carefully: I DON'T want to other throw Mexico's government. That is pretty much the common factor in all your examples.

I want to end the drug war (which would be domestic legislation) and then work with Mexico financially to organize a legal drug trade so that we can end the violence. It's all about violence. If we end that, the problem stops. I don't want to create more violence (like you do). That is stupid, useless, and doesn't solve anything. Just cause more suffering. You must like suffering.

I am saying prison time for those who violate the law and cross illegally a second time, which ironically, is the law as it stands right now, that is chosen to be ignored by the US federal government. And funny how those who are deported, seem to make their way back, and funny how they seem to not be who we would want in the USA in the first place. After all I am sure the families and victims of such, are willing to forgive.

Again the violence. Or they are being sent back by the cartels to cause more violence here.

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain

originally posted by: sheepslayer247

originally posted by: lme7898354
Another fact is yes Mexico has been around a lot longer than the United States, so if Mexico is so great why can't they take care of their own? Corrupt government, drugs, gangs and no jobs, that's not the fault of the people of this country, but Mexico is bleeding refugees over our borders. They have no skills, can't speak the language so who do you think picks up the bill for this? If the Hispanic people love Mexico so much why don't they take the initiative and fix their own country instead of becoming a burden on an already overtaxed American economy.

Wow...the ignorance is strong with this one. How much intelligence does it take to say "if you love Mexico so much, why don't you marry it"?

Did you know that illegals do pay taxes? In fact, they even have taxes taken out of their payroll checks, yet many do not file taxes for a return? That money is just left for the government to use. Do they not pay sales taxes, state and local taxes and property taxes?


Pot meet kettle?

How can one who is here Illegally and Undocumented pay PAYROLL tax when it's Illegal to work under Federal law in every state without a valid SSN or work Visa under Federal Law?

Please....let us all know.

But they can sure as he** get everything else they need with out a SSN. Please explain that.

a reply to: Logarock

They use a fake ID. Normally it one fake SSN per house hold. If you see them apply for work they'll pass around the same SSN card between each other. They'll all pitch in to buy the fake so that no one person has to cover the full cost.

Also states such as MD they can apply for a driver license so a lot will hope over to such states and move to the next for work. It's a loop hole I'm unsure why it hasn't been fixed yet. Plates and tags they'll pass around or sometimes steal, if you see your plats go missing this is why.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
Iraq, during the occupation was under the control by the USA. There was no coalition during the rebuilding and thus it success and failure lies with the USA. All other nations by the time that nation building was taking place had ended leaving the country, leaving the US to take matters into its own hands.

No, I am using the facts in the argument. The facts are that every time amnesty is offered, or the suggestion of such, there is an increase number of border incursions in the USA, and a greater influx into the USA. It seems as though the White House turns around and makes a deal and congress does not uphold on that end of the bargin. So the current system is not working and it is time to take a more hard line stance and a tougher political stance on such. If you change the way and not stem the number of people coming into the country then there will be a mass influx. But if you slow the numbers down, or stop such, and reverse it and then turn around and put forth new regulations and a new system, then it will allow for the system to be able to handle the numbers far greater than it already is.

But this is not about the war on drugs. This is about Illegal immigrants, that are coming into the country, and breaking the laws of the country, and possibly causing more problems than what they should.

I do agree that the war on drugs has been lost, however, I also believe that the way it is handled is wrong and ultimately futile, that there needs to be more on rehabilitation, not just letting people do what they want or regulating dangerous substances. There are consequences for using those substances, and ultimately, the change needs to be made more for the rehabilitation, rather than the incarceration of said persons. Would you not agree that a person addicted to say meth or pot, has a problem and ultimately should be given the opportunity to get help to get out of said addiction?

And there in lies the problem. Here is how that happens and what will happen. These people who are fleeing are not so innocent and there are bad persons who will get through. They flee for all sorts of reasons and if they are trying to escape justice, well would you be so willing to accept a person who was lawfully convicted of rape or hit and run into the country, rather than seeing them face justice? Mind you that with any large influx of persons you get both good and bad. Mind you that this has already been seen. When New Orleans had to evacuate due to Katrina, those cities taking in the refugees got both the good and the bad, and crime rates went up due to the larger number of people. The same can be stated. And if the military can detain and send them back across the border, then that is less people we have to deal with. And if they continue to try to come in illegally, send them to prison, and when they get out, you send them home. The bottom line is that if they are going to break one set of laws, then they are very likely going to break other laws, and it is time that we stop this.

So you are saying the Mexican military, that is armed by the USA, given military equipment to assist in the drug war, is on the take and ultimately, that we should continue to help them out? The public would be more willing to accept the US military protecting the borders far more so than those fighting halfway across the world. And it would stem the tides as the military, would bring in military equipment, including night scopes and heat vision scopes and ultimately it would be a deterrence to the flow of people. The reality is if these people want to change what is going on in their country, they need to do it by themselves, not ask for other countries help. The moment other countries get involved, then they no longer have control over their country at all.

And there is where we disagree, all narcotics, that are currently classified as level 4 and illegal need to remain as such. We can not just merely legalize such as it would be a diseaster in the making and very little good comes of such. The hard core stuff, heroin, meth, cocain, crack, and other items like that do not help the body but causes more problems in the long run for the user. They are poison and can lead to far worse for the user. Even the use of pot is controversial and is causing more problems for those states who allow such, and it is starting to come up.

People have a choice, and it is up to them that they chose to either stand up to the cartels or not. It should not be up to the USA to dictate anything to any other country. It is a bad policy.